It's official: FX is spinning itself off into a new channel called FXX, which will launch in September with four pre-existing FX series: "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia," "The League," "Legit," and "Totally Biased with W. Kamau Bell."

All four shows will be migrating to the new channel, which is replacing Fox Soccer, and should be available in 74 million homes. "Sunny" and "The League" had already been renewed for these new seasons, and FX ordered additional ones for each to carry those shows through the fall of 2014. "Legit" was also renewed, despite modest ratings this winter, and "Totally Biased" will expand into a five nights a week talk show when it moves to FXX.

The quartet will be joined by one new comedy, to be determined, and the goal is to expand to six primetime comedies in 2014 and then add the channel's own original drama series down the road.

When reports about FXX first surfaced in January, the idea seemed to be to split FX in two along genre lines: dramas for FX, comedies for FXX. But at FX's upfront presentation for advertisers this morning (which included the renewal of "Justified" for season 5), FX president John Landgraf — who will now oversee FX, FXM (formerly the Fox Movie Channel) and FXX — said the split will be more along generational lines, with a lot of overlap. FX will still target adults 18-49, FXX 18-34 and FXM 25-54.

"They share DNA, and similar sensibilities," Landgraf explained of the potential viewers for each channel, "but their tastes evolve and find different expressions as their lives change."

The goal is to have FX feature 7 original dramas, a handful of limited series(*), and 4-6 original comedies. FXM will feature movies, repeats of acquired shows in the FX library like "Two and a Half Men" and "Mike & Molly," plus at least one miniseries per quarter. Ultimately, Landgraf wants to have 25 original scripted series airing annually across the three channels, which combined would put FX close to the output of the traditional broadcast networks (who, of course, air that much on a single channel).

(*) While many miniseries are in development, the first one has been ordered, specifically for FX: "Fargo," a 10-episode take on the Oscar-winning film, written by "The Unusuals" creator Noah Hawley, and with the Coen brothers as executive producers. This isn't the first time anyone's tried to adapt "Fargo" for television; Edie Falco played Marge in an unsold pilot in the late '90s. "The series will follow a new case and new characters, all entrenched in the trademark humor, murder and 'Minnesota nice' that has made the film an enduring classic," according to the press release.

Can FX pull this off without diluting what's made the channel so special for over a decade? In describing the target audience for FX proper, Landgraf referred to a hypothetical 35-year-old who started watching the channel with "The Shield" and is at the point where they'll at least sample any show FX premieres. FX has earned that kind of following with a very high batting average (arguably the best on television over the last 11 years), but it's an average built on relatively few at-bats. When you start churning out more and more content — even if it's content from producers like Howard Gordon (whose FX pilot "Tyrant" will be directed by Ang Lee), Guillermo del Toro (who has an FX vampire series in the works called "The Strain") or Danny McBride (developing an animated comedy with his "Eastbound & Down" partners called "Chozen") — the odds go down, even with Landgraf and a terrific development team in place. That FXX is being anchored at the start by "Always Sunny" — a comedy about to enter its ninth season, and now renewed for a tenth — already suggests that some assets are being over-extended, and I say that as someone who still quite enjoys watching Mac, Charlie and the rest of the gang.

Landgraf always comes across as one of the smartest executives in the business, as well as one of the most pragmatic. (Without the latter trait, "Terriers" might still be on the air and doing microscopic ratings.) In general, I trust that he knows the material he has to work with and that it's enough to support this new three-headed beast. And if it means more real estate for shows that are as great and/or experimental as "Louie" or "Justified" or "The Americans," then I'll be a very happy TV viewer indeed.

But I just think about so many businesses in the past (not just in entertainment) that expanded because they thought they should, and struggled once they moved away from the less-is-more ethos.

What does everybody else think? Now that we have concrete details on FX vs. FXX, are you excited to have more channels, and more shows to go with them, or would you rather FX have kept chugging along on its previous course?

Alan Sepinwall has been reviewing television since the mid-'90s, first for Tony Soprano's hometown paper, The Star-Ledger, and now for HitFix. His new book, "The Revolution Was Televised," about the last 15 years of TV drama, is for sale at Amazon. He can be reached at sepinwall@hitfix.com

Fox lost the rights to the Premier League to NBC sports. I don't know if they still have Champions League and Europa games to air on Fox Sports 1 or 2, but no Premier League and competition from other niche soccer networks means no more FoxSoccer.

A while ago it was said that Speed will be re-branded as Fox Sports Channel to compete with ESPN, NBC, CBS etc. Will have Nascar, Soccer and other sports. Have not seen any talk of this in all of these announcements.

Without the EPL rights, there wasn't enough inventory for Fox Soccer Channel to survive. Fox will still have the rights to the Champions League, Europa League, FA Cup and some international games. Those will be broadcast on Fox Sports 1 and Fox Sports 2 starting in August. The details were announced a few weeks ago: http://epltalk.com/2013/03/05/fox-sports-1-to-begin-broadcasting-soccer-in-august-end-is-near-for-fox-soccer/

Doubtful, since Terriers was designed for the hypothetical FX viewer Landgraf described today, and I doubt FX's acceptable ratings floor will be any lower. But a new drama on FXX would likely have more leeway.

Again, though, the Terriers ratings were really, really, really awful. And you know how much I love Terriers.

Does money have anything to do with this? (Well, obviously.) I mean, is the reason for splitting into 3 channels because they'll get more in subscriber fees from the cable companies this way than they would as one big channel?

I assume that's it, because it's not like FX is lacking in available real estate for original programming. They've established themselves on three different weeknights. They're trying to double their subscription and ad fees with only minimal cost increase.

Is this the culmination of a long term plan, or was this spurred by FoxSoccer losing Premier League rights and the company then scrambled to come up with a way to keep that channel and the subscriber dollars that come with it?

Yeah, this definitely seems like it will lead to dilution, especially if there is so much overlap. The demographic split may make sense for advertisers, but wouldn't viewers want to know one channel for movies, one for comedies, one for dramas?

There are only so many hours in the day to watch shows. Even if they make good ones I find I have to ignore things I might like just because I don't have time for it all. New channels full of shows potentially make that even worse.

Alan, I've been scanning all the various press releases on this topic, and I haven't been able to find any information about what the plans are for Archer, Wilfred, and Louie in this new system (or Anger Management, but frankly I don't care what happens to that one). They reiterate that Louie will hopefully return in 2014, but don't mention what channel will air it. Wilfred will air its third season on FX this summer, and obviously would need to score a renewal for Season 4 before this even becomes an issue. But Archer has already been renewed for Season 5, and will presumably return in January on whatever channel it airs on. Given its high ratings in the demo, it seems like it could help establish the new channel, but if they're still planning on having original comedies on FX, then something has to stay, right?

Did Landgraf give any indication what the plan will be be for these shows? Will they air continue to on FX, and then transition to FXX later once the channel is established? No worries if you don't have any more information at the moment - I'm just curious.

Louie will be on FX, for sure, based on everything Landgraf said about target audiences. He specifically listed Louie when describing his hypothetical FX viewer. Wilfred is supposed to be on FX this summer, at least, and no one's said anything about the next year of Archer.

So will FX be competing with FXX? Will a new Always Sunny air on FXX at the same time a new Sons of Anarchy is airing on FX? I don't really understand this in the sense that they just seem to diluting FX by splitting it up over two networks that will each get worse ratings than one strong network.

Even Landgraf's assessment "FX caters to 18-49 while FXX caters to 18-35" means FXX is just cutting into the FX viewer share. I don't get it.

That is my question too - will FX only air 3 nights a week and FXX 3 nights? (No one wants to air on Saturdays). What's happens if the hypothetical 35 year old wants to watch two shows at the same time? Its seems like FX is eating itself. I'm sure they have thought this through but still seems risky.

I'm with you. This sounds completely unnecessary and doomed to fail. Its like some weird publicity stunt to counter the recent developments from Netflix and even Kickstarter in "changing the model"....I mean COME ON, is FX really struggling to find air time for its shows? If show, they could show less of the 40 episodes of 2.5Men and HIMYM that they air each week. Oh and the 30 hours a week of Grown-Ups, The Other Guys or whatever 3 movies are in their current rotation.

And that's where it gets really weird. At first I thought they wouldn't air their original series against each other, because well ... that's stupid. But then if they never have original series airing on the two channels simultaneously, then they're essentially saying that they could very easily fit all their original programming on a single network, which would amount to a public admission that this maneuver is nothing more than a cash grab, spreading the same amount of content out but for a higher price.

I feel like this might be a bit of an overreach, and I wonder if perhaps Mr. Landgraf is getting pressured from people above him. I think the way FX has developed as a channel is exemplary, and I watch and enjoy many of the shows they offer, but this feels like corporate greed overpowering common sense.

Just one example: I think Totally Biased is a good show, but I feel like it isn't yet a strong enough show to expand to five nights a week. It's too soon, plus I already record Daily Show and Colbert and watch them the next day/evening, and as another commenter pointed out, there's only so much time to devote to TV.

Yeah, I honestly didn't expect to like Legit and really only gave it a shot because of FX's track record. But its really growing on me. It has a really cool buddy comedy feel to it (with Steve sometimes added too).

"In describing the target audience for FX proper, Landgraf referred to a hypothetical 35-year-old who started watching the channel with "The Shield" and is at the point where they'll at least sample any show FX premieres."

As literally a 35-year old male who started watching FX with The Shield and will now sample literally anything FX offers (as long as Charlie Sheen isn't involved), I guess I'm proud to know I'm finally someone's target audience. Even though the similarity is a little too much for me to be totally comfortable with.

Alan, speaking of Legit, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the progression of the first season. You gave it an early recommendation and I thought the first three episodes were wonderful....hilarious and heart-warming in equal measure. But since then, I feel like the wheels have been slowly coming off, and last week's episode was probably the worst thing I've seen on TV this season. However, most people commenting on Legit seem to still be on board, so I'm curious as to your thoughts.

At this point, does anyone really care what channel something is on? I watch the Americans, and I have to sit and think for a minute what channel it's on. It feels like an AMC show, but it's not. And it doesn't matter. When I'm recording stuff on my DVR, it all ends up in one bucket of content. That bucket is now the 'channel'. It's the "Stuff I Like Channel"

Speaking of the Shield - I never watched it and would like to but I find it odd you can't find it anywhere to watch. I think the only two places I've seen it are purchase the dvd's or dvds on Netflix- No streaming, no FX on demand. And they've never run it again since the finale that I've seen. Do you know why Alan? Or any idea if they might run it again?

I also wonder if this is over expansion, however, as far as television networks/series go, FX was smart to value quality over quantity, as the number of episodes in the seasons of FX's "series in transition", if you will, are generally significantly lower than successful comedies on networks in the past. Will this change turn them into everyone else? I think it might. They should have invested in more diversity amongst there creative minds to keep their trend stronger longer.

FXX is not even in the basic package. You have to upgrade to the 250 package to receive this channel. I am very disappointed that this is the way this channel will work. I hope I can see my shows online, because I will not upgrade just for this channel